Congress moves to ban cockfighting in US territories

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Congress moves to ban cockfighting in US territories
Danica Coto, Associated Press
Updated 5:23 pm CST, Wednesday, December 12, 2018

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — Congress on Wednesday gave final passage to legislation that would shut down legal cockfights in U.S. territories including Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, ending an institution dating from the colonial era that generates millions of dollars each year.

Opponents of the measure approved by the House said it will have a devastating effect on the islands' economies, noting that in Puerto Rico alone the cockfighting industry generates some $18 million a year and employs some 27,000 people.

"We're all going crazy. Everybody is desperate," said 86-year-old Angel Ortiz, who owns a cockfighting ring in the city of Bayamon. "There are so many people who make a living off of this."

Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rossello traveled to Washington to demand that the island be excluded, but he arrived too late. Legislators unexpectedly moved up the vote and approved the bill, which already passed the Senate.

https://www.chron.com/news/world/article/Congress-moves-to-ban-cockfighting-in-US-13461663.php

Read more: https://www.chron.com/news/world/article/Congress-moves-to-ban-cockfighting-in-US-13461663.php

[KPN]

1. We are so fucked. Cock fighting for human gambling and profit shouldn't

exist anywhere. But really? This is what this 115th Congress chooses as a priority in this moment of history?

It can’t get any more discouraging.

[LuvNewcastle]

2. What about prize-fighting humans?

People spend a lot more betting on championship fights. I mean, if we care about gamecocks enough that we have laws against exploiting them in fights, why do we allow people to beat each other senseless for money? I really don't mind if they make cockfighting illegal, but I think human fights are even worse. Gamecocks are bred specifically for cockfights. It's really all they know. I suppose you could say that about some humans as well.

[christx30]

3. The main difference is that the humans

choose if they want to fight or not. They work hard and train and push themselves. The roosters have no say in the matter. And the fights are sometimes to the death.
From a priorities-of-Congress standpoint, I think it’s stupid to push for a ban of something that’s been going on for over 100 years (and, let’s face it, will continue illegally long after the ban is enacted).
But from a humanitarian standpoint, the ban is the right thing to do.

[Scruffy1]

4. I guess chickens are more important than people.

What do expect from a country that spends hours a day watching some form of violence porn in the form form of pro sports. I grew up in farm country and a chicken is just a chicken. After hatching nearly all the males are run through a shredder. I think it was just some window dressing to make the Red brand seem kinder and gentler, at least when it comes to chickens. Humans not so much.On the other hand I don't really buy the economics argument that it employs a lot of people. I've heard this same thing to promote mega stadiums at the taxpayer expense. People have x dollars to spend on entertainment and they are going to spend it somewhere so its all a zero sum game. Lame duck Congresses need to be legislated out of existence

[LanternWaste]

5. Free will and freedom of personal choice.

"why do we allow people to beat each other senseless for money?"

Free will and freedom of personal choice. And, as the human fights are not designed to kill the defeated, it seems a rather large degree of difference between the two.

I think boxing, and hunting for pleasure and the Jackass franchise of movies are as idiotic as humans can illustrate; but I also think that to a point, we have to allow people the choice (all things being equal-- critical conditional) to engage in stupidity, as long as that stupidity is consensual and brings no harm to other sentient life.